David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Minds and Machines 3 (4):453-474 (1993)
Collective entities and collective relations play an important role in natural language. In order to capture the full meaning of sentences like The Beatles sing Yesterday, a knowledge representation language should be able to express and reason about plural entities — like the Beatles — and their relationships — like sing — with any possible reading (cumulative, distributive or collective).In this paper a way of including collections and collective relations within a concept language, chosen as the formalism for representing the semantics of sentences, is presented. A twofold extension of theA–C concept language is investigated: (1) special relations introduce collective entities either out of their components or out of other collective entities, (2) plural quantifiers on collective relations specify their possible reading. The formal syntax and semantics of the concept language is given, together with a sound and complete algorithm to compute satisfiability and subsumption of concepts, and to compute recognition of individuals.
|Keywords||Plurals concept languages generalized quantifiers part-whole relation|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
Peter M. Simons (1987). Parts: A Study in Ontology. Oxford University Press.
Jon Barwise & Robin Cooper (1981). Generalized Quantifiers and Natural Language. Linguistics and Philosophy 4 (2):159--219.
Stuart C. Shapiro & William J. Rapaport (1992). The SNePS Family. Computers and Mathematics with Applications 23:243-275.
Fred Landman (1989). Groups, I. Linguistics and Philosophy 12 (5):559 - 605.
Godehard Link (1983). The Logical Analysis of Plurals and Mass Terms: A Lattice-Theoretic Approach. In P. Portner & B. H. Partee (eds.), Formal Semantics - the Essential Readings. Blackwell 127--147.
Citations of this work BETA
Massimo Libardi (1994). Applications and Limits of Mereology. From the Theory of Parts to the Theory of Wholes. Axiomathes 5 (1):13-54.
Similar books and articles
Helen Morris Cartwright (1993). On Plural Reference and Elementary Set Theory. Synthese 96 (2):201 - 254.
Margaret Gilbert (2002). Collective Guilt and Collective Guilt Feelings. Journal of Ethics 6 (2):115-143.
Byeong-Uk Yi (2005). The Logic and Meaning of Plurals. Part I. Journal of Philosophical Logic 34 (5/6):459-506.
Melinda Bonnie Fagan (2011). Is There Collective Scientific Knowledge? Arguments From Explanation. Philosophical Quarterly 61 (243):247-269.
Alex Oliver & Timothy Smiley (2006). A Modest Logic of Plurals. Journal of Philosophical Logic 35 (3):317 - 348.
Byeong-uk Yi (2006). The Logic and Meaning of Plurals. Part II. Journal of Philosophical Logic 35 (3):239-288.
Boudewijn de Bruin (2009). We and the Plural Subject. Philosophy of the Social Sciences 39 (2):235-259.
Juha Kontinen & Jakub Szymanik (2008). A Remark on Collective Quantification. Journal of Logic, Language and Information 17 (2):131-140.
Yoad Winter (2003). Monotonicity and Collective Quantification. Journal of Logic, Language and Information 12 (2):127-151.
Gilad Ben-Avi & Yoad Winter (2003). Monotonicity and Collective Quantification. Journal of Logic, Language and Information 12 (2):127-151.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads27 ( #145,112 of 1,907,145 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #467,610 of 1,907,145 )
How can I increase my downloads?